Social-Ecological Processes and Impacts Affect Individual and Social Well-Being in a Rural Western U.S. Landscape

Abstract

To achieve agroecosystem conservation strategies while balancing the needs of people who live and work across rural landscapes, it is critical to understand what people need to improve and sustain their quality of life and well-being. Research that is designed to connect social-ecological dynamics, landscape change, and human impacts to human well-being and ecosystem health is well-suited to inform land management strategies and decision-making for agricultural production policies. We asked livestock producers, public land and resource managers, recreation users, conservationists, and wilderness advocates who live and work among rural communities in southwestern Idaho to describe social-ecological conditions that support and degrade their well-being. Using grounded theory methodology, we analyzed semi-structured interviews to discover meanings of well-being and to understand how people experience changes to their quality of life in an arid rangelands context. Our findings support previous research that suggests well-being is experienced at both individual and community scales, with sense of well-being influenced by ecological, economic, and socio-cultural processes. Specifically, our findings illuminate the role of social interactions as processes that support agroecosystem conditions and functions to the benefit or detriment of human well-being and ecosystem health. Community is not just a geographic territory; it is a process of social interactions through which people build, improve, or damage relationships that support or degrade well-being. By integrating scholarship on social change processes, ecosystem services, and impacts to human well-being, we contribute an integrated framework with a comprehensive set of social-ecological concepts to be used as a common language and synthesis guide for agroecosystem researchers and practitioners. We discuss our findings in the context of the USDA Agricultural Research Service's national network for Long-Term Agroecosystem Research (LTAR). The LTAR network is charged with identifying strategies for sustainable intensification that support agricultural productivity, environmental quality, and rural well-being. Our research sheds Bentley Brymer et al.Communal Processes Affect Rural Well-Being light on the functions of agroecosystem stakeholders and rural communities beyond their adoption (or not) of new technologies and management practices. Future assessments of environmental change and impacts must adequately address social processes that, alongside ecological processes, affect well-being for rural communities and landscapes.

A framework for sustainable management of ecosystem services and disservices in perennial grassland agroecosystems

“…Although it is difficult to calculate cultural disservices in monetary value, these trade-offs have significant implications for sustainable agroecosystem management and human well-being, making them a critical research area. It is crucial to draw on the social sciences in conjunction with ecological research to elucidate how grassland intensification impacts human dimensions (Bentley Brymer et al 2020; Box 2; Knowledge gap 9).…”

“…Social cohesion through ranching and other cultural activities also provides opportunities to teach younger generations, encouraging ranchers and their children to remain in rural areas (Lindborg et al 2008), ensuring future food supplies. Ultimately, ecological, environmental, economic, and socio-cultural processes, including social interactions among stakeholders, support agroecosystem functions and human well-being (Bentley Brymer et al 2020).…”

Moving Beyond Disciplinary Silos Towards a Transdisciplinary Model of Wellbeing: An Invited Review

“…There is much evidence to suggest that community is deteriorating (Kemp et al, 2017a), including generational shifts in narcissism (Twenge, 2013), declines in perspective taking and empathic concern (Konrath et al, 2011), increasing individualism (Santos et al, 2017) and inequality (Nolan and Valenzuela, 2019). Community is more than an aggregation of individuals, it is communicative and interactive, a dynamic process involving social interactions that support individual wellbeing (Brymer et al, 2020). Despite evidence of deterioration, humans are driven to connect with others, to feel a sense of attachment and belonging to the social group.…”

Unravelling the mechanisms linking cultural ecosystem services and human wellbeing

“…Engaging in ecosystem-related livelihood activities can instil pride and sense of satisfaction. In many cases farmers through their livelihood engagement with nature feel fulfilled, have pride for their lives, and a sense of purpose in life when putting a good day at work 110 . 12 Transactive…”